State vs Hamid

(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL) The present application for leave to Appeal is directed against the Judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.8.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Anand, in Sessions Case No. 17 of 2008, whereby the accused have been acquitted for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 396, 397, 120-B, 412 of I.P. Code.

We have considered the Judgment and the reasons recorded by the learned Special Judge. We have considered the record and proceedings. We have heard learned A.P.P. Mr. K.P. Raval for the State.

It appears to us that as per the evidence on record the chain in the case of circumstantial evidence is not proved. Not only that, but, the discovery panchnama, recovery panchnama, identification parade panchnama are not proved and any of such witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution. Learned A.P.P. has not been able to show any material on record which may support the case of the prosecution. On the aspect of identification parade though learned Executive Magistrate has supported the case of the prosecution, but, in the holding of identification parade the requisite procedure is not followed and further the panchas of such parade have not supported the case of the prosecution.

Under these circumstances, if the learned Additional Sessions Judge has found that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt, the same cannot be said to be erroneous.

Hence, leave does not deserve to be granted, therefore, not granted. Application disposed off accordingly.

(JAYANT PATEL,J.) (Z.K.SAIYED, J.) sas Top